From: "Mark Brown" <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, 17 May, 2024 13:11:43
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 05:05:41AM -0400, Elinor Montmasson wrote:
>> From: "Mark Brown" <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>> > This description (and the code) don't feel like they're actually generic
>> > - they're clearly specific to the bidrectional S/PDIF case. I'd expect
>> > something called -generic to cope with single CODECs as well as double,
>> > and not to have any constraints on what those are.
>
>> I proposed, in an reply of the v3 patch series to Krzysztof Kozlowski,
>> the compatible "fsl,imx-audio-no-codec" instead of "generic".
>> Krzysztof thought it was too generic, but it would convey more clearly
>> that it is for cases without codec driver.
>> Would this other compatible string be more appropriate ?
>
> No. There is very clearly a CODEC here, it physically exists, we can
> point at it on the board and it has a software representation. Your
> code is also very specific to the two CODEC case.
Then maybe it's not be a good idea to make this compatible generic
for this contribution.
The original intention is to bring support for the S/PDIF,
so maybe the contribution should focus on this use case?
In that case, would changing the compatible for "fsl,imx-audio-spdif-card"
be acceptable?
"fsl,imx-audio-spdif" is already used for the `imx-spdif.c`
which does not use the ASRC.
[Index of Archives]
[Pulseaudio]
[Linux Audio Users]
[ALSA Devel]
[Fedora Desktop]
[Fedora SELinux]
[Big List of Linux Books]
[Yosemite News]
[KDE Users]